Re: GNU tools netbsd vs netbsdelf

[Valery Ushakov <uwe%stderr.spb.ru@localhost>]

On Sat, Jun 12, 2021 at 08:12:58 +0200, Martin Husemann wrote:

> On Fri, Jun 11, 2021 at 11:01:07PM +0000, David Holland wrote:
> > Anyway, a much less theoretical problem is: if you are closely enough
> > tied to the GNU triple system that a minor inconsistency like this
> > causes trouble, where will you be the next time they decide to change
> > it around upstream as a political football?
> 
> I still do not understand the original issue. The failure to build
> for
> 
> 	i686--netbsd
> 
> triggerd this, and while
> 
> 	i686--netbsdelf
> 
> was accepted by the upstream gcc configure script, it still does not make
> much sense, as it should be
> 
> 	i486--netbsdelf
> 
> instead. There are probably hundreds of targets you could configure that do
> not match any real NetBSD supported target, and the list varies over time
> (see recentish arm OABI removal).
> 
> So if you have to know what you are doing (or look it up) anyway, why
> is any change needed? I have never before seen anyone actually wonder
> about the names in this magic tuples, or suggest cosmetic changes.

+1

This looks an awful lot like a fools' errand to me.

Also, consider that people might have makefiles/scripts written for
the current names, so if $tools/shle--netbsdelf-gcc of say netbsd-9
suddenly becomes $tools/shle--netbsd-gcc in netbsd-10 - it just
creates random work for random people.  Now everyone have to adapt to
work with both older and newer versions so that you can make things
look a tiny bit nicer.

The current scehme works, warts and all, why break it?

-uwe